"Where's the context?"
The context is that the universe could be finite but endless if it was curved, like a "4D-Sphere" (or 5D if time is also curved that way). But if it's flat, it's rather infinite. That's why I started talking about curved space.

If you walk on the triangle I told you about in my last post, you would also "just walk on the projection" and still measure 270°. Same for the universe. Trust me, we can measure that space is curved, or Einstein would have never found that out in the first place.

Expansion has nothing to do with an infinite or finit universe.


@PHeMoX:
"Why would an end be so unlikely? I think it's more a 50/50 kind of thing actually."
That would prompt many questions, like how do things behave near the end. What if you try to go beyond that end? Should there be an undestructable end? That somehow sounds... unlikely. But maybe possible.

"I think infiniteness here is a somewhat semantical thing. Does 'ever expanding' mean 'infinite' also? Or does it have to be 'without boundaries'? What if it has a boundary that's expanding too fast to ever catch up with? I'd say that would qualify as 'infinite' from our perspective as well."
I guess that would be no real infinity, although we couldn't distinguish it. But we can't look further than 14 billion lightyears anyway, if there is some boundary behind it, we would never find out.